EEarlier this week, the highly anticipated presidential debate between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump took place. But one of the most newsworthy events of the evening occurred after the exchange ended, when pop megastar Taylor Swift voiced her support for Harris on Instagram. “The easiest way to combat misinformation is with the truth. I will be voting for Kamala Harris and Tim Walz in the 2024 presidential election,” Swift wrote in her caption under a photo of herself holding a cat. “With love and hope, Taylor Swift, childless cat lady.”
Swift’s reach was massive and immediate – other celebrities such as rising WNBA star Caitlin Clark and Jennifer Aniston also liked the post, which received millions of likes within minutes. More than 300,000 new visitors went to vote.gov as a direct result of Swift’s post, an action she reinforced in her words at the VMA awards the following night: “If you are over 18, please register to vote for something else that matters – the presidential election.”
In today’s social fabric, parasocial relationships prevail – a celebrity is seen not only as an entertainer to be liked and enjoyed, but also as an extension of a fan’s moral, social and political values. In a political context, the transitive logic of I am a good person and I like X as my favorite star, so they must be good too, has a high potential to develop rapidly in, I am a good person and my favorite star’s candidate is X, so he must be the right candidate because my favorite star is also good and right.
That’s been a boon for the Harris-Waltz campaign, which has struggled to catch up in an accelerated campaign cycle. Endorsements, celebrity-driven social media trends like Charli XCX’s “Brat Summer” and pithy talking points have served as effective placeholders as the vice president’s campaign team works to fill in the gaps of a campaign that was built on the fly and whose policy platforms were only released this week.
Swift is the latest in a wave of celebrities using their platforms to support Harris and Walz. Since the July ballot, celebrity support has poured in in the form of donations, social media endorsements and stars actively serving as alternate delegates. Megan Thee Stallion, for example, founded her own advocacy group, Hotties for Harris, and also performed at Harris’ rally in Atlanta. “We’re doing really damn well. I’m proud of us,” the Houston rapper said in a recent Billboard interview. “Now we just have to get out there and vote.”
Florida rapper Plies, who has always gone viral on the internet, has turned his social media presence into a space to promote the Harris campaign and defend her against what he perceived as misogynistic and racist attacks. “To the men that look like me,” he said in an Instagram video in August, “stop asking a damn black woman to explain herself to you.”
Celebrity endorsements are common in the modern political era, and Hollywood elites have become public figures. For example, in 2004, disgraced music executive P Diddy launched the “Vote or Die!” campaign with his organization Citizen Change to prevent George Bush’s re-election. This tradition has long been around, but with the advent of social media, the connections between celebrities or influencers and their fans and consumers have intensified, and with them the potential reach and impact of those decisions. Leveraging this parasocial economy through vocal celebrity endorsements was an effective short-term way for the Harris campaign to drum up fan enthusiasm.
Ultimately, however, celebrities are not campaign or policy experts, and relying on them can prevent direct engagement on certain issues. One glaring example is Gaza – while delegates such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have claimed Harris is actively working toward a ceasefire, the candidate’s comments sound dissonant. Harris has recognized the Palestinians’ right to self-determination over the years – yet in campaign speeches and at the recent debate, she undermined ceasefire rhetoric by repeating, “Israel has the right to defend itself.”
These gestures downplay the impact of the crisis that has been called genocide and are a defense of Israel’s actions in the face of widespread international criticism, including from the International Court of Justice. The euphoria that follows Swift’s endorsement may ultimately prove alienating to young democrats who are actively fighting to bring attention to this critical foreign policy issue – the voice of an emerging constituency dwarfed by the reach and influence of one of our biggest stars today.
Celebrities are undoubtedly key to generating political enthusiasm, but relying too heavily on their reach can quickly become a double-edged sword. As the Harris-Walz campaign continues into the final two months of the election season, it must convey a unified message that reaches all the voters it hopes to court.
